At 12:03 AM 12/03/2002 -0800, Rev. Shamim Mohamed D.D. wrote:
> > [Shamim writes about removing destroying our obsolete RPM's and
> > eliminating plans to provide RPM's in the future.]
>Brief *BSD plug: in contrast, if I set the env. variable PKG_PATH to a
>URL that has binaries (the *BSD equivalent of rpmfind.net) I can just
>say "pkg_add -v ${PKG_PATH}/package-name" - it will recursively
>install all dependencies. Something like debian's apt-get but even
>better, because packages and ports [built from source] know about each
>other so I can have a random mix of things installed as binaries and
>things I compiled myself.
This is theoretically a good idea, but in practice, automated dependancy
fulfillment is a bad idea behind a metered Internet link. Believe me in
this; it was most hair-raising doing a Scoop install
(http://scoop.kuro5hin.org/) and seeing it try to upgrade Perl! That's an
8Mb download, BTW, and I pay for my downloads by the Mb.
RPM's lack in this regard is, for me, a hidden blessing. OTOH, I
(personally) have no problem at all with a tarball, source, binary or
otherwise.
>Sorry for rambling. Anyway, the question for Linux is: which Linux?
>Which versions of the kernel and libc etc. are most popular? I have a
>spare machine that is only used to play NPR programs via RealAudio, I
>volunteer to install the blessed distribution on it and provide
>binaries.
RH6.2 used to be a good, widely-compatible target. That's Linux 2.2.16 and
glibc 2.1.3. With the current version of RedHat now being 7.2, this might
not be so anymore, but it's a start.
2c deposited.
Wade Bowmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"All around me are nothing but fakes
Come with me on the biggest fake of all!"
_______________________________________________
Unicon-group mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/unicon-group
